The Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for the Trump administration to resume building border wall barriers in Texas’s Big Bend region.

The decision marks a setback for bipartisan opponents who maintain the project wastes money and threatens a unique natural landscape.

The border wall remains a signature initiative for President Donald Trump, who has long promised a continuous barrier extending from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico.

Backed by $46 billion in funding approved by congressional Republicans last summer, Customs and Border Protection has been rapidly installing 12 miles of barriers weekly along the border.

The administration has pushed the project forward by issuing broad regulatory waivers. These measures circumvent environmental protections that typically slow down major infrastructure developments.

Across Texas’s Big Bend region, cross-party opposition has organized to halt the plans, which involve 30-foot steel walls, vehicle barriers, and new road networks.

Critics argue these physical structures threaten the local economy and lifestyle in an area with historically minimal illegal immigration.

They argue border monitoring could be handled more efficiently with surveillance technology, including drones.

A Texas judge initially sided with the opponents, ruling that Congress likely had not authorized such wide-ranging waivers in the sector with the southern border’s lowest migrant apprehension rate. She ordered an immediate halt to construction across Big Bend National Park and neighboring state and private land.

The Trump administration filed an emergency appeal, arguing that illicit crossings and drug seizures persist in Big Bend, and warned that gaps in the wall would draw more illegal traffic.

The Supreme Court concluded that law strictly limits judicial intervention when the federal government determines expedited border barrier construction is required. The court paused the lower ruling while the case continues. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.

The suit was brought by the Center for Biological Diversity alongside Friends of the Ruidosa Church and a regional river guide. Laiken Jordahl, a national public lands advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity, noted this was the first time broad environmental laws were waived inside a national park.

“This horrific decision clears the way for contractors to bulldoze pristine desert and dynamite canyon walls before the courts have even decided whether this destruction is legal. They’re signing off on the permanent destruction of the wildest place in Texas, and the theft of a great American river from all of us,” Jordahl said.

Other critics include Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who published an op-ed opposing the project Monday in the San Antonio Express-News.